On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Francis Dupont wrote:
> In your previous mail you wrote:
>
> Currently systems are often ipv4 only. One day they just don't magically
> turn into ipv6 only boxes. Dual stack is the way the world is going
> towards.
>
> => I can't see where/when I said I'd like to get IPv6 only boxes ASAP?
If you port applications to ipv6-only system, it usually implies you
might want to actually use them too. If application is ipv6-only, the
only way user cannot set the hell on loose is by shipping them in
ipv6-only system :-).
> All of these have existing, _working_ IPv4 network implementation. No one
> is going to just completely replace ipv4 with ipv6 one nice afternoon.
>
> => I don't want to replace IPv4 by IPv6 next month, I want to get
> dual stacks as default ASAP. RFC 2553 is for dual stacks and
> dual stack is the main transition tool.
On dual stacks, user can usually disable ipv6. Examples of this are Linux
or BSD which nowadays ship ipv6-enabled by default. However, some users
can turn it off intentionally or unitentionally. As Itojun pointed out,
recompiling the user space is not usually an option.
So, porting applications so that they can handle both gracefully is the
way it should be done for about 5+ next years.
IMO, this must be kept in mind when defining the API's.
--
Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
